|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 4, 2014 11:33:17 GMT -4
Charlottetown were bigger sellers than buyers lol They brought in Mason McDonald and 2 rookie D but they also gave up Laplante & Bibeau. They brought in 4 more 1sts than they gave up in the trades. You want CB to go acquire more 1sts? No, we've already done that selling to acquire those 1sts. The idea was to move older assets (Carrier for us Bibeau for them) for assets in the future (MacDonald for them and still picks for us) I think it's a pretty clear picture.
|
|
|
Post by bois on Nov 4, 2014 11:34:10 GMT -4
We were huge sellers.. biggest sellers ever i imagine
anyways i'm not here to argue just an observation.. like i said i'm not suggesting buying is the wrong approach.. i see both sides
|
|
|
Post by Judas In My Mind on Nov 4, 2014 11:35:35 GMT -4
A few differences this year though Bois. Cape Breton has a lot of young guys on their roster, plus some good young prospects not even on the team this year. Plus they have a pile of 1st round picks in the next 2 years. They probably could buy a player or two at some point with nothing but using some of their picks and young players, keep the 1 or 2 young guys they really covet, and not "sell the farm" doing so and have the eventual years of complete suckage after buying. Also they never should have went for it that year, assuming we're talking about the same year where they acquire Legace. That year they were quite a ways behind Moncton's and Saint John's teams and would have had to do a ton more buying than they did to catch up. Thus they were really the third best team in their own division, back when they playoff format for round one still was divisional #1 vs. #4, and #2 vs. #3. Thus they were guaranteed to catch either SJ or Moncton in round one, and out the door they went. Not that unlike a team currently in 16th spot (obviously I do expect they will eventually climb up the standings somewhat... but we are getting close to a 1/3 of the way thru the season here) and yet some posters are suggesting they should be buying 19 year olds now... in a memorial Cup hosting year at that I'm not saying it's the wrong approach.... i'm just saying it's a bit hypocritical and the two situations are comparable... right now they'd be playing Rimouski in the playoffs.... why buy to bow out early? Yeah I don't know what your team should do Bois lol. They definitely are playing much worse than I expected, in pretty much every area. Cape Breton I see differently. They have those pile of 1st round picks still for starters. They have decent young prospects not even on the roster in L'Italien and Corbeil for example. They could acquire some things to help them for this year AND next year without spending too much to affect their future in a negative way. Meaning they wouldn't be draining their system of youth and guaranteed to suck for a couple years after making some deals to "go for it". Combine that with how Cape Breton, while underachieving as well, seems to have the offense in place. The main issue seems to be the goaltending. The feel I get is if they had good goaltending, plus maybe added another decent defenseman, they'd turn things around and be very tough to beat. They likely could catch up and win the division and get at least a #3 seed. If they couldn't win the division they likely still get like a #5 seed or so, and what still should be an easy start to the playoffs....unlike what the 2009-2010 version of CB had to face.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 4, 2014 11:37:22 GMT -4
We were huge sellers.. biggest sellers ever i imagine anyways i'm not here to argue just an observation.. like i said i'm not suggesting buying is the wrong approach.. i see both sides You don't see us having the extra 1sts as already done our selling? What's the difference if the 1st you moved for MacDonald came in a trade a day, week, or year before? We sold last year too. Nothing better we could have done then go after MacDonald last year. We waited and lost out. With the assets we have, why lose out again this year if the right players are there for the taking?
|
|
|
Post by jamesnorris on Nov 4, 2014 11:37:43 GMT -4
No, we've already done that selling to acquire those 1sts. The idea was to move older assets (Carrier for us Bibeau for them) for assets in the future (MacDonald for them and still picks for us) I think it's a pretty clear picture. It's not when you call his comparison inaccurate while comparing CB to Charlottetown last year when they were sellers. McDonald isn't a trade that's easy to recreate. A) There isn't many Mason McDonalds in the league and B) There isn't many in such a poor situation that they're screaming to get moved anywhere that will have them. Cooper was an offseason trade which is where you typical trade for those core players.
|
|
|
Post by bois on Nov 4, 2014 11:39:20 GMT -4
Not that unlike a team currently in 16th spot (obviously I do expect they will eventually climb up the standings somewhat... but we are getting close to a 1/3 of the way thru the season here) and yet some posters are suggesting they should be buying 19 year olds now... in a memorial Cup hosting year at that I'm not saying it's the wrong approach.... i'm just saying it's a bit hypocritical and the two situations are comparable... right now they'd be playing Rimouski in the playoffs.... why buy to bow out early? Yeah I don't know what your team should do Bois lol. They definitely are playing much worse than I expected, in pretty much every area. Cape Breton I see differently. They have those pile of 1st round picks still for starters. They have decent young prospects not even on the roster in L'Italien and Corbeil for example. They could acquire some things to help them for this year AND next year without spending too much to affect their future in a negative way. Meaning they wouldn't be draining their system of youth and guaranteed to suck for a couple years after making some deals to "go for it". Combine that with how Cape Breton, while underachieving as well, seems to have the offense in place. The main issue seems to be the goaltending. The feel I get is if they had good goaltending, plus maybe added another decent defenseman, they'd turn things around and be very tough to beat. They likely could catch up and win the division and get at least a #3 seed. If they couldn't win the division they likely still get like a #5 seed or so, and what still should be an easy start to the playoffs....unlike what the 2009-2010 version of CB had to face. this i agree with however i expected them to be higher (Cape Breton) in the standings by now..... the further we go the harder it is going to be to make up that ground to suggest the two situations are not comparable is wrong..... both are similar if they remain underachieving by trade period time.. buying in a year where you are facing a very difficult path to a title they aren't identical... but they are comparable
|
|
|
Post by bois on Nov 4, 2014 11:43:22 GMT -4
We were huge sellers.. biggest sellers ever i imagine anyways i'm not here to argue just an observation.. like i said i'm not suggesting buying is the wrong approach.. i see both sides You don't see us having the extra 1sts as already done our selling? What's the difference if the 1st you moved for MacDonald came in a trade a day, week, or year before? We sold last year too. Nothing better we could have done then go after MacDonald last year. We waited and lost out. With the assets we have, why lose out again this year if the right players are there for the taking? i'm not sure what you are asking? if you can acquire the right players go for it.... i think that's always the right approach however the right players this Christmas will be expensive and if you're still way down in the standings i think waiting til the off-season is perhaps a better approach
|
|
|
Post by jamesnorris on Nov 4, 2014 11:45:01 GMT -4
i'm not sure what you are asking? if you can acquire the right players go for it.... i think that's always the right approach however the right players this Christmas will be expensive and if you're still way down in the standings i think waiting til the off-season is perhaps a better approach preach
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 4, 2014 11:58:48 GMT -4
You don't see us having the extra 1sts as already done our selling? What's the difference if the 1st you moved for MacDonald came in a trade a day, week, or year before? We sold last year too. Nothing better we could have done then go after MacDonald last year. We waited and lost out. With the assets we have, why lose out again this year if the right players are there for the taking? i'm not sure what you are asking? if you can acquire the right players go for it.... i think that's always the right approach however the right players this Christmas will be expensive and if you're still way down in the standings i think waiting til the off-season is perhaps a better approach Perhaps. I think situations like MacDonalds are a good reason to see what's out there now and evaluate the situation this year rather then not even think of addressing it until June or next Christmas The longer you wait the more you risk a player you want going elsewhere. Would Charlottetown have benefited by not acquiring MacDonald when they did and waiting until June? Every player situation is unique and I think we both agree that if you wait that player goes elsewhere and come June you may still have the same assets to move but may not have the same player(s) available to you.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 4, 2014 12:00:41 GMT -4
i'm not sure what you are asking? if you can acquire the right players go for it.... i think that's always the right approach however the right players this Christmas will be expensive and if you're still way down in the standings i think waiting til the off-season is perhaps a better approach preach me and bois essentially agree with each other and you say 'preach'. Not only hilarious but adds so much to the discussion. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 4, 2014 12:04:27 GMT -4
You don't see us having the extra 1sts as already done our selling? What's the difference if the 1st you moved for MacDonald came in a trade a day, week, or year before? We sold last year too. Nothing better we could have done then go after MacDonald last year. We waited and lost out. With the assets we have, why lose out again this year if the right players are there for the taking? i'm not sure what you are asking? if you can acquire the right players go for it.... i think that's always the right approach however the right players this Christmas will be expensive and if you're still way down in the standings i think waiting til the off-season is perhaps a better approach #1 I asked if you believe we've already sold. I do since we already have the 1sts. #2 I pointed out that since we have the assets to move, we should be involved in the conversation now if the right player(s) are in play. I think we lost out on MacDonald and now have a huge gap to fill between the pipes and it would be a shame for that same thing to happen. If what you need next year is available to you this year and returns then I pay the higher price to get the player now. I understand why some would rather not to that. I just believe the risk of the player ending up on the competition again is not being considered by some. Nobody cares what MacDonald costs Charlottetown if they win with him.
|
|
|
Post by jamesnorris on Nov 4, 2014 12:09:41 GMT -4
me and bois essentially agree with each other and you say 'preach'. Not only hilarious but adds so much to the discussion. Thanks. You responded to it so it added at least 1 post to the discussion I've never seen you say "however the right players this Christmas will be expensive and if you're still way down in the standings i think waiting til the off-season is perhaps a better approach" in fact I've seen you go off on me for suggesting that. You should just stop trying to call me out, you're bad at it.
|
|
|
Post by bois on Nov 4, 2014 12:14:25 GMT -4
McDonald was a 17 year old prospect when we acquired him..... hardly what would have fit into the go for it this year aproach for Cape Breton
If you can find a two year starting goalie this Christmas..... by all means you should be all over it
as for whether you guys sold or not... i don't remember what assets you moved last year to acquire so many firsts... i seem to recall you got a bit lucky with the whole Nick Roy situation which gave you extra firsts.... not sure I call that selling in the true sense of the word.. who else of value did you move?
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 4, 2014 12:23:09 GMT -4
me and bois essentially agree with each other and you say 'preach'. Not only hilarious but adds so much to the discussion. Thanks. You responded to it so it added at least 1 post to the discussion I've never seen you say "however the right players this Christmas will be expensive and if you're still way down in the standings i think waiting til the off-season is perhaps a better approach" in fact I've seen you go off on me for suggesting that. You should just stop trying to call me out, you're bad at it. Because you keep talking black and whites that don't take any variables into the discussion. Then when asked direct questions you post half pages of 'lol' and silly google images. The whole time my argument has been that these talks have been happening for weeks among GM's and that if the right players are there now we should be trying to acquiring them whether we're in 1st or 18th place. Your 'opinion' the whole time has been 'we'll see where we are and i'll have an opinion then' so while the rest of us are having the discussion, shouldn't you be waiting to see where we are rather then chiming in with 'i told you so' and 'stop calling me out' childishness? Most posters here can have normal adult conversations and banter with each other. You're too busy trying to win the internet or something and can't even follow most conversations accurately as you're too busy trying to pick out statements to prove some point you're either wrong about or nobody cares about. To get back on topic: I've never said to blindly buy either. Just said that now is the time to look at buying for next year since it can also benefit this year. That was where you disagreed with me and said now is too early and you are waiting before making any decisions.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 4, 2014 12:25:37 GMT -4
McDonald was a 17 year old prospect when we acquired him..... hardly what would have fit into the go for it this year aproach for Cape Breton If you can find a two year starting goalie this Christmas..... by all means you should be all over it as for whether you guys sold or not... i don't remember what assets you moved last year to acquire so many firsts... i seem to recall you got a bit lucky with the whole Nick Roy situation which gave you extra firsts.... not sure I call that selling in the true sense of the word.. who else of value did you move? We have an extra 1st this year from the Carrier deal. That's the big one I was referring to. The other 'extra 1st' is from the Roy deal. I agree that if the right piece is there this year we should do it.
|
|